As far as I am concerned, the whole affair, is a colossal Screw-Up. The WikiLeaks Dude, needs to get caught, and sent back to Sweden, to face the charges pending there, and the Pentagon Kid needs to be tried for Treason. I really could not care less if Hillary, looks like the fool that she is, or Obumma, now, seems as inept as I figured he was three years ago. The Pentagon Kid was entrusted with State Secrets, and when you leak that stuff you commit Treason. Just consider a SHTF scenerio, where one of your own, leaks all your group defense plans, and cache locations, to the outsiders. What do you think the Group would do, to such a person?

Bruce in alaska (BTPost) An Atheist will never be able to say, "I TOLD YOU SO"!! ....

How would you feel about an informant turning evidence on a gang or the mafia? They'd still be his "Group" he was betraying.

All a matter of perspective. One mans rebel is another mans freedom fighter.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Except he's not. He's releasing information which jeopardizes HUMINT source operations. Ultimately, the sources will be killed. The intel they were providing will no longer be available and US troops are at risk because of it.

It's treason. It's murder. Plain and simple.

If he was whistle blowing for the good of something, it would be different. I understand it's in vogue to try to "rat gov't secrets", but this is a bit too far.

"Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: [...] as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."Joshua 24:15

Click to expand...

"As a friend says, always reach first for the obvious answer in a puzzle. If you hear hoof-beats, think horses, not zebras."

Except he's not. He's releasing information which jeopardizes HUMINT source operations. Ultimately, the sources will be killed. The intel they were providing will no longer be available and US troops are at risk because of it.

It's treason. It's murder. Plain and simple.

If he was whistle blowing for the good of something, it would be different. I understand it's in vogue to try to "rat gov't secrets", but this is a bit too far.​

Click to expand...

I share your feelings, and BTPost, on this one. Although I have considered the "right to know" aspect, it is my personal opinion that this is one of the times security trumps general public knowledge. I struggle with this.....​

"The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion."Albert Camus________________________________If I have been of service, if I have glimpsed more of the nature and essence of ultimate good, if I am inspired to reach wider horizons of thought and action, if I am at peace with myself, it has been a successful day. Alex Nobel

If I have managed to get through the day without wishing bodily harm to another human being, if I have gotten through the day without killing a plant, if I have been able to get at least 2 hours of sleep, if I have been able to hide my fangs behind a smile and rain on my heart behind a laugh, it has been a successful day. my evil twin

if the information that was leaked was older info that was covered up and didn't have any "in operation" context, I wouldn't have any problem with it. I think we have a right to know at the very least, after the fact. Ex: if they actually had a leaked doc of who killed a high profile person, wink, wink. However.. while an op is play and so long as it's the government NOT screwing us.. I say "hands off".

Well, I 'might' have been able to dl the entire archive but with 250k of them, yeah, i might be reading them until after the 2012 solar flare. and printing them would be cost prohibitive.

as for treason vs. patriot until i see the actual cable, with procedures and process, drop locations, names of US intelligence assets THAT were not already know to the community at large. i'll reserve my judgement until i can digest a larger portion of what is available out there.

anyone have a specific cable id that they could point as evidence as treasonous to release?

I have learned not to say something about someone behind their back that i wouldn't say to their face. that way you can't be blackmailed later.

what about the banks? what about the fraud the gov't is pulling? you know what.. as bad as this guy may seem..I think it sort of has become a necessary evil or the truth will never come out. It's all the truth or no truth at all and the truth hurts..

I share your feelings, and BTPost, on this one. Although I have considered the "right to know" aspect, it is my personal opinion that this is one of the times security trumps general public knowledge. I struggle with this.....
[/COLOR][/LEFT]

Click to expand...

I too share that struggle between state secrets and public right to know. The Wikileaks aren't about exposing an abusive gov't (for the most part). They are about trying to make a name... damn the expense in US lives (or Afghan lives for that matter).

We live in a post-Vietnam media that prizes being able to "uncover" secrets. The only real scoop in wartime is failure. Success doesn't sale. All these Geraldo types are trying to make a name for themselves and have little understanding of how their actions affect operations on the ground. I have seen more than a few reporters kicked out of country for printing something that was not supposed to be printed. Operational capabilities are the normal violation. I have seen entire collection methods made void for months because of a slip up by a reporter. It seriously hindered operations at the National level. It took months to start all over.

On the other hand, I think whistle blowing is good. I think we should be open with the media. If PFC Smith wants to share his opinion on the war, so be it. Of course, you have to understand that you are receiving an opinion from a kid that wastes his entire pay check on Xbox games and is probably worried about the next level of guitar hero instead of how his interaction with the local populace affect the entire operation. Americans want to see the faces of their boys at war and I believe they should do it. If Joe wants to blog about his war experience and isn't violating OPSEC, do it. There is no better way raise support for a conflict than to talk to those extraordinary men and women that do the job.

There is a wall of distrust between the military and the media. Our response to the mistrust is to be even more guarded, thus we are in this cycle. The only way to break that barrier is to let Joe's story out and let the American people see what he faces.

"Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: [...] as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."Joshua 24:15

Click to expand...

"As a friend says, always reach first for the obvious answer in a puzzle. If you hear hoof-beats, think horses, not zebras."

How would you feel about an informant turning evidence on a gang or the mafia? They'd still be his "Group" he was betraying.
All a matter of perspective. One mans rebel is another mans freedom fighter.

Click to expand...

Apples & Oranges, Melbo.... The Mafia or a Street Gang, are not the same as a City State, and a turncoat from a Street Gang or the Mafia, gets treated just like those who are convicted of Treason in a City/State, by their group as well, which was my point. When a MAN, gives his WORD, and accepts the responsibility for keeping State Secrets, and leaks them, then he has NO Personal Integrity, and his Word, from that point on, is forever suspect. I would have no truck with any such person, if I KNEW, that they had this kind of event, in their PAST, period. YMMV....

As far as Assange goes, I do not have any problem with him posting, or printing, whatever he can get his grubby little hands on. That is Freedom of the Press, and he is free to write, or publish whatever he chooses, as far as I am concerned. HOWEVER, he needs to go face the charges in Sweden, and then come back and tell us all about how he was framed, AFTERwards... He would get a fairer trial in Sweden, on those charges, than anything he would ever get, here in the good old USA, from our government folks.

Bruce in alaska (BTPost) An Atheist will never be able to say, "I TOLD YOU SO"!! ....

Except he's not. He's releasing information which jeopardizes HUMINT source operations. Ultimately, the sources will be killed. The intel they were providing will no longer be available and US troops are at risk because of it.

It's treason. It's murder. Plain and simple.

If he was whistle blowing for the good of something, it would be different. I understand it's in vogue to try to "rat gov't secrets", but this is a bit too far.

Click to expand...

HUMINT sources compromised and resources to be killed? I think we're talking about two different things. I haven't read the current documents that are being called "Cable-Gate" yet. What's an example of this? I thought it was email traffic that would be cause for high level embarrassment from our top .gov officials (Like Hillary, etc).

What I was referring to in my first post was the release of the footage of the murder of the Reuters Journalists by Brad Manning. Video here: Collateral Murder

I'd really like to know more about all of this. I've never quite trusted Assange and often thought the whole 'wikileaks' thing was actually a propaganda arm of the .gov. He falls in line with the party line in his theories.

Hmm, kind of makes me wonder why a young private (22) would be allowed to have security access to diplomatic cables with out being monitored in some fashion.

how many corporate networks monitor where you have been on the internet, record the files that you have saved to CD or memory stick or hell even block saving of files. Is the government going to admit that their cyber security isn't even as good as a $2MM annual revenue mfg company that has some trade or process secrets? Now if that was the case the Chief Security Officer (military/diplomatic/civilian) should be facing gross negligence, dereliction of duty and be shot as well.

Something doesn't smell right. We are all looking here at this huge dump of 'classified' information (legislative branch is looking as well) . I wonder what is going on over there (unknown and unseen). I wonder if this is a decoy? Some gossip mixed in with some truths and half truths ?

I don't know the answer but, it sure seems like a little bit of Sun Tsu's 'Art of War' Deception and Foreknowledge to me.

Then again, I am pretty sure the gummermint would never lie to it's peeps.
[footinmouth]

what about the banks? what about the fraud the gov't is pulling? you know what.. as bad as this guy may seem..I think it sort of has become a necessary evil or the truth will never come out. It's all the truth or no truth at all and the truth hurts..

Click to expand...

And that is why they are trying everything in their power to silence "them". Might be some pissed off citizens if the truth comes out about .govs, .bankster shenanigins.

How do you know where I'm at, when you haven't been where I've been, understand where I'm coming from.... Here is something you can't understand...

Wikileaks, following much media fanfare (reason for suspicion right there) has just released a huge number of documents supposedly leaked to WikiLeaks and no other websites'. The media is denouncing this as a threat to the United States while US politicians wring their hands and wonder when they will be free of the curse of the First Amendment and all that troublesome nonsense about Freedom of Speech. Many observers think this is a propaganda set up and that neither Julian Assange or WikiLaeks should be taken at face value. After all, Julian Assange keeps insisting there was no 9-11 conspiracy and the 9-11 truth movement a "distraction." Apparently Julian Assange has patented conspiracy and nobody else may expose one except himself!

Of course, there is really not that much that is new in this latest dump. Like prior WikiLeaks dumps, most of it is old news mixed with some rather dubious claims. In his last such dump, Julian Assange included a claim that Osama bin Laden is still alive and controlling Al Qaeda. Of course, it is well documented outside the United States that Osama bin Laden has been dead for many years and that Al Qaeda itself is a fake front group created to hoax Americans into endless wars of conquest, much as the fictional Emmanuel Goldstein was used in George Orwell's "1984."

In yet another infamous propaganda attempt, WikiLeaks tried to claim that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, justifying the invasion. No such weapons were ever found.

As for the present batch of documents, again it is a rehash of stories already known to the blog-o-sphere. Even those people who did not know US diplomats spy on their United Nations counterparts did not find it surprising or in any way a new idea.

So what is the real purpose of Assange's little charade? Propaganda.

Propaganda is like rat poison. 95% of it is tasty, healthy food. But the purpose is to get you to swallow the poison. The same is true of the WikiLeaks document dump. The bait are all these old stories which we already knew about, used to convince us that the entire pile is "tasty, healthy food," except that it isn't. Buried in the pile of delicious, albeit past the expiration date morsels are the bits of poison which the US Government knows you will no longer accept at face value from the controlled media, but hope you will eat if handed to you by a con artist posing as hostile to the government.

So, given that 95% of the current WikiLeaks is really old news, as a public service I will point out the bits of poison that Julian hopes you will eat.

1. Iran is bad so you should all want to kill them.

2. Saudi Arabia is bad because they are funding Al Qaeda so you should all want to kill them.

3. North Korea is bad because they gave really long range missiles to Iran for Iran to put their nuclear warheads in, so you should all want to kill them.

4. China is messing with your computers, so you should all want to kill them.

That about sums it up. Oh yes, there is nothing negative about Israel in all these diplomatic messages, an impossibility given the lethal Israeli attack on the Aid Flotilla last May. That suggests who Assange really works for.

Funny thing about rat poison. After a while the rats learn to eat the food and leave the poison behind.

By Behrouz Saba at newamericamedia.org
The quarter of a million American diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks reveal that American diplomats have a low opinion of the thuggish Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. They call him "feckless." Equally underwhelming are the revelations that Nikolas Sarkozy is "temperamental" and Muammar al-Gaddafi likes flamenco and blondes. What is more, some of Iran's Arab neighbors look to Tehran with fear and loathing, Afghan politicians are corrupt, and American corporations lobby the Congress.

The global media is in a tizzy, repeating the same mundane, stale information from 251,287 cables released by WikiLeaks, a media organization that claims a loosely organized network of international contributors. Curiously, such publications as The New York Times, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, Le Monde and Spain's El País have carried the leaks dutifully, even though their well-policed pages are otherwise governed by highly divergent philosophies, policies and practices. Even more curiously, all news organizations repeat the same cherry-picked factoids that their ace reporters apparently culled from the documents.

No wonder that some on the Internet believe WikiLeaks to be a “false flag” operation—part of a Big Lie mounted by the American intelligence community.

Julian Assange, the curious-looking founder of WikiLeaks—a cross between Casper the Friendly Ghost and Illya Kuryakin of the 1960s TV spy series The Man from U.N.C.L.E.—has the kind of checkered, globe-trotting past that makes him a prime recruit for intelligence services.

At the same time, most Americans quickly dismiss these charges, asking why their government would covertly conspire to release information that is potentially damaging to itself.

A closer look shows the many ways that these revelations bolster the status quo in Washington. They mainly deflect public attention from far more urgent issues—including a broken economy, dysfunctional governmental services, Obama's chimera of hope and change, and a general hollowing out of America at its core, commensurate with its imperial reach.

More than that, the leaks characterize an increasingly unaccountable United States as the "victim," equate investigative journalism with treason, and communicate without repercussion Washington's frank opinion of world leaders with whom it is less than pleased. (It doesn't hurt the Obama administration a bit for the world to know that certain Arab capitals are just as opposed to the Ahmadinejad regime as Tel Aviv is.)

Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of spy craft and the long history of similar false-flag operations would never question the benefits of such ruses to preserving many vested interests. This history includes the Gulf of Tonkin report, the counterproductive "war on drugs," and "detection" of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, to name just a few.

Yet the majority of Americans would be hard pressed to name even one or two agencies in the vast, well-funded intelligence apparatus that sucks up their taxes while remaining virtually unanswerable to them and their elected representatives.

In reality, the system is composed of 16 agencies whose existence is verifiable and another six that are thought to act in total secrecy. Most Americans know about the Central Intelligence Agency, but it iis among the smallest, least well-funded of the group, which is mostly under the Pentagon command with a total annual budget of nearly $50 billion. The fact that the State, Treasury and Energy departments also have covert operations will come as a surprise to many Americans. Asking people on Main Street to define the functions of the National Security Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office or the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency is sure to invite blank stares.

America's covert machinery, easily the largest in world history, reaches every corner of the globe, gathering, hiding, publishing or distorting information to suit its own purposes. On its payroll are politicians and artists, scions of noble families and common gangsters, visionaries, crackpots, assassins and healers the world over.

It would not be surprising at all if WikiLeaks were being used by this intelligence network to do its bidding, knowingly or otherwise. Surely this would explain the almost comical spectacle of WikiLeaks "releasing" tons of potentially damaging information while America's entire intelligence community merely whimpers like a whipped dog— as if the U.S. were not capable of moving the website out of civilian reach and erasing it from existence as easily as it introduced the Stuxnet virus to the computers of an Iranian nuclear plant. (Overshadowed by the WikiLeaks's non-news was the Monday morning bombing in Tehran that killed one Iranian nuclear scientist and injured another.)

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must be trying hard to keep a straight face as she "apologizes" for or otherwise "explains" the words of the bad boys and girls of American diplomacy. Equally constrained must be Attorney General Eric Holder, who speaks of an "active and ongoing criminal investigation" of WikiLeaks. Sorely missing is a voice sufficiently powerful within the government or major media to question this global spectacle, which doesn't pass the smell test on many levels.